Archive for October 4th, 2009

“To understand why eugenics gained such a following in the first three decades of the 20th century, one needs to examine the economic, social, and political context in which it flourished. Science, or what is claimed to be science, is a product of culture like any other human activity.” – Dr. Garland E. Allen (Professor of Biology – Washington University)

American eugenics developed in the wake of turbulent economic and social problems following the Civil War. The rapid growth of American industry, coupled with the increased mechanization of agriculture, created the first major migration away from farms, and cities expanded faster than adequate housing. Exploitation of labor created militant labor union organizations. Price fluctuations bankrupted many businesses and precipitated a series of depressions, starting in 1873, and reoccurring about every decade through the early 1900s. This further fueled labor unrest. The situation was made worse by an ever-increasing tide of immigrants, mostly from Southern and Eastern Europe, which peaked just before, and again after, World War I.

Social Darwinism had attempted to explain away social and economic inequalities as the “survival of the fittest.” However, by the turn of the century, this simplistic idea had been turned on its head. A declining birthrate among the wealthy and powerful indicated that the captains of industry were, in fact, losing the struggle for existence. The working class not only was organizing against them, but they were also out-reproducing them. At the same time, traditional approaches to solving the problems of the urban poor charity, social work, and religious institutions were proving of little help. Solving the new problems of industrialization demanded a change from laissez-faire to managed capitalism toward the increased role of government and planning in the economic and social sphere. This new philosophy became known as progressivism. Embedded in progressivism was the idea of scientific management long-range planning by university-trained experts. This new managerial class became increasingly vital to the economic process. In a country that had nurtured a reverence for invention, the use of scientific management had a special appeal.

Progressive reformers had a strong faith in science as the cure-all that would herald in a new era of rational control of both nature and human society. Under these conditions, it is not surprising that the revelations of a new science of genetics gave birth to a new science of social engineering… eugenics.

In the great global chess match, the Axis of Evil exchanges pieces with Russia towards a check-mate on Iran, while Afghanistan is set to be the proving ground of an open-ended military strategy.

The G20 crowns itself queen of the global economy, as our civil liberties are pawned off the board for the illusion of security.

If the audience is the human masses, they seem blithely disinterested in the high-stakes moves on the board and only vaguely aware that beneath the board itself Mother Nature is shaking the table, rattling the Earth and making waves.

September was yet another episode in the slow motion collision of humanity’s tragic history and reality.

Playing Chess With The Usual Suspects

It was rather obvious that Obama’s U-turn on the missile shield on Eastern Europe was to be used as a bargaining chip with Russia. Placing the ‘shield’ in Poland and the Czech Republic was a clear attempt to ensure US military dominance in the region and over Russia in particular. Now however, the US has backed down, changed course and decided to station Ballistic-missile defense ships in the waters around Europe instead (more on that further down). But what is Obama asking of the Russians in exchange for this rare example of US diplomacy? We have a clue from a report which appeared a few months ago in the Russian newspaper Kommersant, which reveals that Obama wrote to Russian President Dmitry Medvedev to tell him that Russia’s aid in resolving the ‘threat’ from Iran would make the missile ‘shield’ plans unnecessary.

Another clue comes from Israeli Prime Minister and notorious psychopath Benjamin Netanyahu’s secret meeting in Moscow, which many read as a sign of an impending attack on Iran – and they may be right. We can picture ‘Bibi’ making the Russians an offer they couldn’t refuse: get tougher on Iran, and we will gladly instruct Obama to take away those pesky rockets from Poland and the Czech Republic!

Whatever the case, the move worked just fine for Israel, as it is now apparent that Russia has hardened its stance on Iran, which includes endorsing additional sanctions against the country.

With Russia apparently out of the way (although one never knows with that wiley Putin at the helm), Britain, the US and France are free to step up the pressure. While Iran claims that IAEA rules apply to the new Qom nuclear site – and so far there is no reason to believe otherwise – the Axis of Evil is demanding visits to what it is called a ‘secret’ site. Their bellicose rhetoric is filled with indignation that Iran ‘surprised’ them with this second site, despite the fact that it’s location was well known as far back as 2006. This axis of proven liars argue that the Qom plant is “probably intended for producing highly-enriched uranium for weapons” because “it is too small for the kind of plant that would be needed to enrich the large quantities of uranium needed for a civilian power program….” However, the opposite argument has been used against the Natanz plant: that it’s too big for civilian purposes.

Damned if they do, damned if they don’t. But such is the logic used by these pathologically infested Westen powers when they MUST have war, at any cost. What’s next we wonder; “Dear Iran, have you stopped beating your wife yet?”

In keeping with the neocon style, the intel is being fixed around the policy. Next thing you know Colin Powell will dazzle us all with a presentation at the United Nations showing blurry satellite pictures and badly hand-drawn pictures that ‘prove’ that Iran has got the bomb and is planning to use it in 45 minutes. Indeed, as Peter Symonds observes:

Obama’s campaign bears an unmistakable resemblance to Bush’s use of the weapons of mass destruction allegations in the run-up to the war against Iraq. Like the Iraqi regime, Tehran is confronted with an impossible task – to prove a negative, namely, that it has no plans for a nuclear weapon. The failure to find evidence in one place simply leads to lurid new allegations and fresh demands to allow more extensive intrusions by international inspectors that have close links to Western and Israeli intelligence agencies. The purpose of such demands is not to test the veracity of Iran’s claims but to justify an escalating confrontation. […]

The current campaign against Iran is not the product of a recent policy shift, but of longstanding plans. The tactics being followed by the Obama administration can be found in outline in a series of think tank studies by the Bipartisan Policy Centre, the Centre for a New American Security and the right-wing Washington Institute for Near East Policy last year. While varying in details, the reports all advised a steady escalation of diplomatic pressure followed by punitive sanctions, backed by preparations for military strikes.

Dennis Ross, who is well known for his pro-Israel views and links to Bush’s notorious neo-cons, was centrally involved in all of the studies. He is currently Obama’s top national security adviser on Iran.

No sooner had the UN finally, after 60 years of muffled protest, formally censured Israel for War Crimes and threatened to refer the statelet to the International Criminal Court in The Hague, than up stepped Netanyahu to the podium. No doubt emboldened by Obama’s immediate and predictable defense of the indefensible, Netanyahu felt confident enough to step up his rhetoric at the UN against what he called the “tyrants of Tehran”: “The struggle against Iran pits civilisation against barbarism … History could be reversed if primitive fanaticism acquires deadly weapons.” This is good example of the donkey speaking against the evils of having long ears. It is a fact that Israeli Zionism is primitive fanaticism par excellence and one which is equipped with 200-400 nuclear weapons. It is also a case of outstanding hypocrisy on the part of the UN, as the Security Council called for all nations to join the Non-Proliferation Treaty, singling out Iran for criticism (which has no nuclear weapons), while allowing the five Security Council permanent members to keep their arsenal for the time being. But not only that; less than a week before, several of the UNSC members (including the US, which proposed the resolution), opposed a call for Israel to join the NPT.

Here is a 3-D reconstruction of the most dangerous weapons manufacturing plant in the Middle East: Dimona in Israel…

Dimona

Some of you might be thinking: “But we have been hearing about this imminent bombing of Iran for years and they haven’t done it.” Well, precisely. Perhaps that is part of the approach for deceiving a world population that is all-too-aware of the blantant lies that preceded the Iraq war. The pathocrats are counting on the fact that the masses of people have no long-term memory for political crimes. They also know they need patience and time to sell the unsaleable. Years of constant propaganda will make up for the lack of rational arguments and evidence. When it finally happens, they hope that fatigue and denuded willpower from successive rounds of shock treatment will anesthetize those who would protest and resist.